Validity in Qualitative Research: A Processual Approach

By Hayashi, Paulo, Jr.; Abib, Gustavo et al. | The Qualitative Report, January 2019 | Go to article overview

Validity in Qualitative Research: A Processual Approach


Hayashi, Paulo, Jr., Abib, Gustavo, Hoppen, Norberto, The Qualitative Report


Introduction

An adequate effort in the pursuit of validity assurance seems to be vital in order to have a work accepted by the scientific community (Morse, Barret, Mayan, Olson, & Spiers, 2002). Furthermore, it is necessary that qualitative research strives to firmly demonstrate its scientific nature to obtain an in-depth understanding of the phenomena studied without losing sight of the subtlety of the immersed researcher's subjectivity in a context that is in constant change and development (Drapeau, 2004b; Van der Maren 1996; Van Maanen, 1995). Validity in qualitative research can have different meanings, such as rigor, trustworthiness, appropriateness, and even as quality, and it can be described in a great variety of terms (Golafshani, 2003). However, despite the importance of the concept to the development of the qualitative research field, few studies try to fill up this gap and to help solving the quest (Golafshani, 2003; Kvale, 1995; Lincoln, & Guba, 1985; Maxwell, 1992; Onwuegbuzie, & Johnson, 2006; Whittemore, Chase, & Mandle, 2001; Winter, 2000).

This article aims to analyze the processual aspect of validity in qualitative research. This issue seems to be fundamental when addressing a qualitative study due to its nature, proposal, ontology and the variety of research methods that are involved (Royer, 2007; Thompson, 2011). However, one may pose the following question: Why should a researcher adopt a processual rather than a traditional validity approach? We argue that the focus on ensuring validity and transparency of qualitative research is not specific to any single stage of the research; instead, it should be part of all research stages.

Unlike validity in quantitative studies, qualitative validity is not a watertight product or a set of measures that can ensure the validity of the research. There are paradigmatic, ontological and epistemological differences between quantitative and qualitative or mixed research (their incommensurability is not advocated here) (Drapeau, 2004a; Hammarberg, Kirkman, & Lacey, 2016; Royer, 2007; Thompson, 2011). There are also differences between the purposes of the research based on the context and the maturity of the field and the available literature. Quantitative studies are not better than qualitative ones and vice versa. They are merely different and could be complementary. As evidenced more recently, there is an increasing process of approximation and dialog between them (Aubin-Auger et al., 2008; Benedicto, Benedicto, Stieg, & Andrade, 2011; Brannen, 2017; Creswell, 2009; MolinaAzorin, & Fetters, 2016). However, while validity is recognized and widespread in quantitative research, the same cannot be said for qualitative studies (Drapeau, 2004a).

We need broader discussions on how to maintain quality, accuracy and consistency between the problem, the data, and the methods of qualitative studies (Baxter & Jack, 2008; Leung, 2015; Mukamurera, Lacourse, & Couturier, 2006; Winter, 2000). It seems unrealistic to adopt the same criteria for validity and reliability used in quantitative studies, reinforcing the argument in favor of adopting a processual approach to validity since it allows for the control of the validity at different stages of the research. This seems to be a coherent approach to the maintenance of scientific criteria, especially for different types of methods, epistemologies and qualitative ontologies. Dubé and Paré (2003) had already included elements of validity in the research process to obtain scientific rigor, such as a strongly formulated research question, a well-described theory, a research design that potentiates the scientific aspects of the study, and a well-described process of collecting and analyzing data.

This paper is divided into four sections. The first section provides a description of validity that was originally developed in quantitative studies. The second section reviews the versions of validity applied to qualitative studies. …

The rest of this article is only available to active members of Questia

Already a member? Log in now.

Notes for this article

Add a new note
If you are trying to select text to create highlights or citations, remember that you must now click or tap on the first word, and then click or tap on the last word.
One moment ...
Default project is now your active project.
Project items
Notes
Cite this article

Cited article

Style
Citations are available only to our active members.
Buy instant access to cite pages or passages in MLA 8, MLA 7, APA and Chicago citation styles.

(Einhorn, 1992, p. 25)

(Einhorn 25)

(Einhorn 25)

1. Lois J. Einhorn, Abraham Lincoln, the Orator: Penetrating the Lincoln Legend (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1992), 25, http://www.questia.com/read/27419298.

Note: primary sources have slightly different requirements for citation. Please see these guidelines for more information.

Cited article

Validity in Qualitative Research: A Processual Approach
Settings

Settings

Typeface
Text size Smaller Larger Reset View mode
Search within

Search within this article

Look up

Look up a word

  • Dictionary
  • Thesaurus
Please submit a word or phrase above.
Print this page

Print this page

Why can't I print more than one page at a time?

Help
Full screen
Items saved from this article
  • Highlights & Notes
  • Citations
Some of your highlights are legacy items.

Highlights saved before July 30, 2012 will not be displayed on their respective source pages.

You can easily re-create the highlights by opening the book page or article, selecting the text, and clicking “Highlight.”

matching results for page

    Questia reader help

    How to highlight and cite specific passages

    1. Click or tap the first word you want to select.
    2. Click or tap the last word you want to select, and you’ll see everything in between get selected.
    3. You’ll then get a menu of options like creating a highlight or a citation from that passage of text.

    OK, got it!

    Cited passage

    Style
    Citations are available only to our active members.
    Buy instant access to cite pages or passages in MLA 8, MLA 7, APA and Chicago citation styles.

    "Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences." (Einhorn, 1992, p. 25).

    "Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences." (Einhorn 25)

    "Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences." (Einhorn 25)

    "Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences."1

    1. Lois J. Einhorn, Abraham Lincoln, the Orator: Penetrating the Lincoln Legend (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1992), 25, http://www.questia.com/read/27419298.

    Cited passage

    Thanks for trying Questia!

    Please continue trying out our research tools, but please note, full functionality is available only to our active members.

    Your work will be lost once you leave this Web page.

    Buy instant access to save your work.

    Already a member? Log in now.

    Search by... Author
    Show... All Results Primary Sources Peer-reviewed

    Oops!

    An unknown error has occurred. Please click the button below to reload the page. If the problem persists, please try again in a little while.